Evidence for God from Science

BavarianWheels wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:The reason you are not liking my answers are because you have made the question into a loaded question. Bart is exactly right, you are asking a question which embeds premises that are in dispute. So I apologise if you do not accept my response as fulfilling. I would have thought given our long history here, you would at least treat me respectfuly. However, the issue is not with my response, but rather with your quesiton which commits a logical fallacy.

Perhaps you could answer this following question for me: "Do you accept that we are saved entirely by faith in Christ and reject we must worship God on the Sabbath, or will you deny we are saved by faith alone in Christ?"

Many blessings.

I am now traveling up to San Fran and cannot take the necessary time to get at this for the moment, but rest assured I will do so in the next day or two.

However the short answer is this:
I accept that we are saved entirely by faith. ENTIRELY by faith through Christ, by His works credited to us. I reject that Faith stands alone as the Scriptures tells us. Faith without works is dead. If there's an inward change, then there is an outward manifestation of that faith and as Paul points out, this faith does not nullify the Law. THE 10. There is no circumcision or priestly work in the 10.

I agree that the Holy Spirit works with us once we come to Christ. However, the inward change that happens is a desire to do what is right out of a love for God rather than obligation.

As you believe we are saved entirely by faith, then I can only assume you do not believe we must keep the Sabbath?

Kurieuo wrote:

BavarianWheels wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:The reason you are not liking my answers are because you have made the question into a loaded question. Bart is exactly right, you are asking a question which embeds premises that are in dispute. So I apologise if you do not accept my response as fulfilling. I would have thought given our long history here, you would at least treat me respectfuly. However, the issue is not with my response, but rather with your quesiton which commits a logical fallacy.

Perhaps you could answer this following question for me: "Do you accept that we are saved entirely by faith in Christ and reject we must worship God on the Sabbath, or will you deny we are saved by faith alone in Christ?"

Many blessings.

I am now traveling up to San Fran and cannot take the necessary time to get at this for the moment, but rest assured I will do so in the next day or two.

However the short answer is this:
I accept that we are saved entirely by faith. ENTIRELY by faith through Christ, by His works credited to us. I reject that Faith stands alone as the Scriptures tells us. Faith without works is dead. If there's an inward change, then there is an outward manifestation of that faith and as Paul points out, this faith does not nullify the Law. THE 10. There is no circumcision or priestly work in the 10.

I agree that the Holy Spirit works with us once we come to Christ. However, the inward change that happens is a desire to do what is right out of a love for God rather than obligation.

As you believe we are saved entirely by faith, then I can only assume you do not believe we must keep the Sabbath?

It's not my Law nor is it mine to nullify.
.
.

Something that has always struck me about 'faith versus works etc', is from Jesus Himself: when Jesus spoke about the Judgment Day, in all the accounts, He stresses the same criteria ie people's actions, rather than their beliefs. It's what people do that gains them entrance into the Kingdom. Jesus is very consisitent about this. 'If you love me you will obey my commands'. Now, you wouldn't say to 'love your enemies' is something we don't have to do, as long as we believe in Jesus etc.

There is also a thread of mercy, forgiveness and love in Christ's words. So much so that the Pharisee's felt the need to question Christ's take on the Law (Matthew 22:34-36) asking:

• 34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"

To which we know Jesus replied:

• "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

It seems to me Christ's focus is not necessarily obligation to specific Laws, or the ten commandments, but rather loving God and showing mercy, forgiveness and love to others. The Law brings condemnation and death, however Christ brings love and hope.

• 10As it is written:
  "There is no one righteous, not even one;
  11there is no one who understands,
  no one who seeks God.
  12All have turned away,
  they have together become worthless;
  there is no one who does good,
  not even one." (Romans 3:10-12)

BavarianWheels wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

BavarianWheels wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:The reason you are not liking my answers are because you have made the question into a loaded question. Bart is exactly right, you are asking a question which embeds premises that are in dispute. So I apologise if you do not accept my response as fulfilling. I would have thought given our long history here, you would at least treat me respectfuly. However, the issue is not with my response, but rather with your quesiton which commits a logical fallacy.

Perhaps you could answer this following question for me: "Do you accept that we are saved entirely by faith in Christ and reject we must worship God on the Sabbath, or will you deny we are saved by faith alone in Christ?"

Many blessings.

I am now traveling up to San Fran and cannot take the necessary time to get at this for the moment, but rest assured I will do so in the next day or two.

However the short answer is this:
I accept that we are saved entirely by faith. ENTIRELY by faith through Christ, by His works credited to us. I reject that Faith stands alone as the Scriptures tells us. Faith without works is dead. If there's an inward change, then there is an outward manifestation of that faith and as Paul points out, this faith does not nullify the Law. THE 10. There is no circumcision or priestly work in the 10.

I agree that the Holy Spirit works with us once we come to Christ. However, the inward change that happens is a desire to do what is right out of a love for God rather than obligation.

As you believe we are saved entirely by faith, then I can only assume you do not believe we must keep the Sabbath?

It's not my Law nor is it mine to nullify.

Are you avoiding my question Bav?

catherine wrote:Something that has always struck me about 'faith versus works etc', is from Jesus Himself: when Jesus spoke about the Judgment Day, in all the accounts, He stresses the same criteria ie people's actions, rather than their beliefs. It's what people do that gains them entrance into the Kingdom. Jesus is very consisitent about this. 'If you love me you will obey my commands'. Now, you wouldn't say to 'love your enemies' is something we don't have to do, as long as we believe in Jesus etc.

Catherine, most see those passages as speaking of reward for believers, not salvation itself.

Works are the fruit of salvation, not the foundation.

Eph 2:8-9

Canuckster1127 wrote:

catherine wrote:Something that has always struck me about 'faith versus works etc', is from Jesus Himself: when Jesus spoke about the Judgment Day, in all the accounts, He stresses the same criteria ie people's actions, rather than their beliefs. It's what people do that gains them entrance into the Kingdom. Jesus is very consisitent about this. 'If you love me you will obey my commands'. Now, you wouldn't say to 'love your enemies' is something we don't have to do, as long as we believe in Jesus etc.

Catherine, most see those passages as speaking of reward for believers, not salvation itself.

Works are the fruit of salvation, not the foundation.

Eph 2:8-9

Isn't salvation THE reward?

If works are the fruit of salvation, and we know "by their fruit"... then unless a man dies immediately after accepting Christ, there must be fruit/works that prove the inward change outwardly.

I'll be back in a bit with at least the first text or two listed yesterday (yesterday?).

Kurieuo wrote:As you believe we are saved entirely by faith, then I can only assume you do not believe we must keep the Sabbath?
Are you avoiding my question Bav?

I assume by the wink that you're kidding, but just in case let me be more specific in answering your question.

If a person understands fully at this moment that the Sabbath is binding on a Christian as an outward manifestation of the inward change (living according to the Spirit) AND CONTINUES to willfully go against one of God's Commands (one of the 10), then I fear for his/her salvation if their heart is not changed in time. If a person, at this moment, is fully convicted that the Sabbath is not binding, having studied the Scriptures exhaustively, then I believe his/her salvation is firm with Christ at this moment...were he/she to die right now. If the Sabbath is important, it will come into play.

Hence the question; If the Sabbath becomes a point of contention in the future, to the point of the example we have in the third chapter of Daniel, (where the question is on worship) what will you do? I can tell you by 100% assurance, that if this was to come about I would continue my belief and "custom" of the Sabbath and suffer whatever consequences there be for such a stance. Are you able to make a stance of like in your conviction? If so, what is it today? I cannot believe I need to word a question in so many different ways for someone to make their stance on a choice which, on the surface, seems clear, yet no one can utter those words here for the whole world to see.

It's very simple. Me speaking: "If a civil law comes down at some point in the future that makes one day the official "rest" day of this nation and thus does away with my religious freedom to worship on the Sabbath, I will continue to worship on Sabbath regardless of this law. I will become a "criminal" to keep in harmony with the nature of the Spirit no matter the consequences handed down by a man."

It's not all that complicated.
.
.
.

So. When you speak of salvation by grace apart from works you mean something other than full reliance by faith upon the finished work of Christ for salvation.

No. Salvation is not "the reward". If it were, it would mean we'd done something to earn or merit it, and it would no longer be grace. The only person who could speak of our salvation as a reward would be Christ and that on the basis of his incarnation, life, death and resurrection which he extends to us as a free gift. We're the object upon which grace is conferred, not the agent who obtains it based upon our performance.

Canuckster1127 wrote:So. When you speak of salvation by grace apart from works you mean something other than full reliance by faith upon the finished work of Christ for salvation.

No. Salvation is not "the reward". If it were, it would mean we'd done something to earn or merit it, and it would no longer be grace. The only person who could speak of our salvation as a reward would be Christ and that on the basis of his incarnation, life, death and resurrection which he extends to us as a free gift. We're the object upon which grace is conferred, not the agent who obtains it based upon our performance.

I need to finish something...and I'm here...grr.

I simply mean as Scripture means. Salvation is fully by grace apart from works since no one can "work" perfectly...in other words no person's works can gain salvation by works so it is fully by grace.

See James 2:18-26.

The words of Scripture seem to be in direct opposition to your point that salvation is not the reward.
Colossians 3:24
Hebrews 1:26
Revelation 22:12 - "my reward is with me..."
.
.

You would need to demonstrate that those passages are speaking of salvation and not reward for the believer post salvation.

Further, and more importantly you would need to reconcile that with the books of Romans and Galatians and the grand theme of salvation by grace through faith alone.

Apparently that's not clear for you or you would have answered K's question more directly and in keeping with the same logical framework that you've demanded answer on other issues.

It's a sad way to walk and live. If I were to return to that approach to God and life I would be very fearful of messing up and probably very angry at others who appear not to have those fears and worries.

Bart, I was going to say the same thing in regard to these verses Wheels is claiming.
BTW, there is no Hebrews 1:26

Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism.

Ok let me see If I unstand the Christian's doctrine concerning the sabbath and the commandments.
You are saved by grace and therefore have no need to strive to keep God/Jesus' Holy Commandment.
God/Jesus' Holy Commandments have been done away with and so there is no longer any need to strive to keep them as they no longer have any meaning to/for Christians.
Even though God/Jesus' Holy Commandments have been done away with Christians are to still us them to condemn all others of unrighteousness but they can not be used to condemn any Christian of unrighteousness.
Christians can keep any day they wish as the sabbath as long as it is Sunday the first day of the week and the seventhday is not to be kept at no time, because if you keep the seventhday sabbath then you are no longer saved by grace, no longer saved, as you have placed yourself under the law.
Only those that strive to keep the sunday, the firstday, sabbath are saved by grace all others are not saved by grace as they are under the law.
If you strive to keep all other laws, but not the seventhday sabbath law then you are still saved by grace and are not under the law for it is only by striving to keep the seventhday sabbath that will cause you to be removed from grace and placed under the law not the striving to keep any other of the laws.
So point of fact is that only the seventhday sabbath law has been altered and changed and it was altered and changed by being removed and done away with. All the other laws still remain and must be followed.
You know the christian belief is to confusing for me. I think I will remain with God/Jesus and His truth and leave you christians to you own confusing selves.

jlay wrote:Bart, I was going to say the same thing in regard to these verses Wheels is claiming.
BTW, there is no Hebrews 1:26

Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism.

Typo, Sorry.

Hebrews 11:26
.
.

Fitzlight wrote:Christians can keep any day they wish as the sabbath as long as it is Sunday the first day of the week and the seventhday is not to be kept at no time, because if you keep the seventhday sabbath then you are no longer saved by grace, no longer saved, as you have placed yourself under the law.

If you're paying attention, they don't "keep" Sunday at all, it's just tradition and the reality (in their theology) is that any day can be "kept" as the Sabbath. At most they "keep" an hour...then it's off to the game, the bar, the swap meet...anything but a "rest" day as made by God.

Fitzlight wrote:Only those that strive to keep the sunday, the firstday, sabbath are saved by grace all others are not saved by grace as they are under the law.

I don't think they believe this either. See note above.

Fitzlight wrote:If you strive to keep all other laws, but not the seventhday sabbath law then you are still saved by grace and are not under the law for it is only by striving to keep the seventhday sabbath that will cause you to be removed from grace and placed under the law not the striving to keep any other of the laws.

Apparently, if I'm understanding you correctly.

Fitzlight wrote:So point of fact is that only the seventhday sabbath law has been altered and changed and it was altered and changed by being removed and done away with. All the other laws still remain and must be followed.

If you're speaking of the 10, then I think, yes, this is what they ultimately hold to.

Fitzlight wrote:You know the christian belief is to confusing for me. I think I will remain with God/Jesus and His truth and leave you christians to you own confusing selves.

It is confusing. One side of their mouth they say one thing, and from the other they say another. Is God's Law holy, righteous and true? Does the Law point at sin? If so, then...
.
.

.
.
During my lunch hour I was researching some points on the texts given me to respond to. While I can and will respond in a personal manner, my ability to convey these points pales greatly in comparison to one of my favorite pastor. (not mine personally, but one which I consider mine) Dr. Desmond Ford has graced my ears plenty in the past 10 or 15 years. I'm "angry" that he decided to move back home to Australia and, I believe, has semi-retired from his ministry ( http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org ) I have not followed him as close since he returned, but often find myself seeking out his sermons online.

In doing so, I bumped into this article by Dr. Desmond Ford entitled, Clarifying the Covenants on a SDA website. Interesting because the SDA Church disfellowshipped him and removed his teaching and/or pastoral credentials for his dissertation on the Investigative Judgement which goes contrary to popular Church belief...but that's another story. Anyway, he touches on most, if not all, the texts listed. It would be intellectually dishonest to simply summarize his thoughts as my own...right? heh. My thoughts on the texts would fall in line with his, though not as intellectual. Mine would read more like a street version and I wouldn't necessarily have all the historical knowledge he bring.

One as low on the totem pole of education as me cannot do justice in putting this into my own words. I would fail miserably and likely come across as rash and judgemental of those that don't hold the same or that I beat my wife...as pointed out by Bart. (I try Bart, but my sinful hot-headedness apparently breaks through in my words.) I'm sure you that are much higher on the totem pole would more appreciate the scholarly words and thoughts.

May I ask you to carefully read this short article. It only takes a few minutes to read through, but there is lots of supporting "evidence" that would certainly take lots of time to go through if you so choose.

Dr. Ford is a great and humble man which I've had the pleasure of meeting several times. One of the most amazing preachers you'll ever have the priviledge of hearing, should you chance a sermon from him. If you do, look up something on the Cross. Simply an amazing manner in which he brings the acts and words of God to idiots like me to understand.
.
.